My first idea upon reading the rules was: hm, why "must" the raider assisting in a showdown use his best hand? Would be neat if one could pledge assistance only to withdraw it by choosing a lesser hand. Losing on purpose, one might say. I have to admit that I'd have to play a few games to check if there is any situation when this might give an edge, though.

Rules look nice. Easy enough to understand fast. Hope the game plays fluent and is as much fun as I hope it is.

Really? House rules? I'm so happy to be avoided this and future franchises of SPM. I Just going to keep the eye on SDE.

If you plan to avoid the game, then it might be best you avoid the forums to. This is a thread for house rules, not your continued complaints.

Xris Wraith wrote:

My first idea upon reading the rules was: hm, why "must" the raider assisting in a showdown use his best hand? Would be neat if one could pledge assistance only to withdraw it by choosing a lesser hand. Losing on purpose, one might say. I have to admit that I'd have to play a few games to check if there is any situation when this might give an edge, though.

Rules look nice. Easy enough to understand fast. Hope the game plays fluent and is as much fun as I hope it is.

Honestly, I'm gonna implement that as a house rule as soon as I start playing. The whole idea of tactically losing is rather hilarious, and seams like it could lead to some fun moments. Good on you!

And yeah...game is looking good. Can't wait to actually play it.

_________________Remember, even if you do not see me, I am always watching...waiting for my moment to write.

Neph, creating a house rule doesn't mean the original rules aren't good as they are. Only that some things work in my gaming group that the general public might not consider good practice. And breaking deals doesn't seem to be on SPMs agenda for RRI, but I like the idea.I have to agree with DF, tho. If it's not constructive, you might as well not post. Thanks for reading, anyways.

I honestly think it would be nicer not to be able to throw the duel (there will already be a lot of negotiating, since you could help someone out by shooting them and moving them to a better location).

A bit of a necromancer move on this thread, but exactly as you said with the move mechanic. If someone joined a showdown and lost on purpose so that the winning player could move them to another car would really be the only reason to not choose the highest hand. It's outside the scope of the core rules but to me falls in line with "I'll do this for you now if you do something for me later" negotiations. Tensions between players may well mean that such negotiations occur, but the game plays fine without this homebrew rule. Adding it makes for a few more interesting interactions between the players, but I personally wouldn't use it since some characters benefit from NOT winning and could abuse this. To each their own though as I really am a fan of making a game your own if you feel it would be better for your group.